Requesting Some Opinions

[shanstress70]

In another thread, Person A said this:

"My mormon wife could leave me and marry some faithful mormon dude, they can go to the temple and 'seal' my girls to this guy, and for all time and throughout all eternity they will REMAIN MY CHILDREN. That's the real point im trying to make."

Person B replied:

"...have you considered the fact that these children were first the children of God? Your own brothers and sisters? Mature Spirits? That you were only given them for a short time as a stewardship?...and The Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away?"

Person B is consistent with her LDS doctrine at this point, but then she goes on to say:

Talents/gifts from Heavenly Father....if you are unworthy...I would hope to hannah that children would be taken from an unworthy parent...would you wish children to stay where they will be spiritually darkened? That would be like condemning them to h..... The woman can and has often had the children adopted by a new husband who was worthy.... and I am sure the Father of us all will make sure HIS children get what is best for them...in all cases...

Please tell me that all you LDS people are not in agreement with Person B! This is not your church's teaching... correct? I am a former Mormon and have always been taught the opposite... a child will not be held accountable for anything until the age of eight. At that point, he or she can supposedly make up their own mind by being baptized, which is the gateway to the celestial kingdom. In LDS teachings, a child's salvation has NOTHING to do with the choice of their parents. Just making sure, because Person B keeps telling me that she is not God and doesn't write the scripture. She can't help if it upsets some. What the...?!

I'm of course speaking of the part where she says that a child is condemned to hell if he/she stays with a parent who doesn't believe in the LDS church! (Yes, she calls this person an 'unworthy parent' just because he doesn't believe in LDS doctrine!)

Just wanted to get some of your opinions on this subect, AND wanted to let you know that people like this are why some people are leaving the church (even if they DO believe!). Personally, I don't believe the church is true, as I have stated in another thread. But I have talked to some who have chosen to leave because they are subjected to this kind of talk/thinking by members.

[Ray]

Talents/gifts from Heavenly Father....if you are unworthy...I would hope to hannah that children would be taken from an unworthy parent...would you wish children to stay where they will be spiritually darkened? That would be like condemning them to h..... The woman can and has often had the children adopted by a new husband who was worthy.... and I am sure the Father of us all will make sure HIS children get what is best for them...in all cases...

Let’s put this into more of a “real” world setting, okay?

You know of some children who live with parents who abuse them. Consider this abuse to be physical, sexual, mental, whatever. The point is that these children are subjected to living in an environment that is simply unacceptable. The parents have been notified and counseled about the abuse by many people, including good neighbors, the police, and even a judge or two, but the parents refuse to change their behavior. What happens next. The parents are taken to one place, and the children to another place. In the best case scenario, society will provide a good home to these children where they can grow and develop into good and healthy people, with loving and caring parents.

Now consider the same situation but only one parent abuses his/her children. The offending parent gets taken away and the children are allowed to remain with the remaining parent, because he/she did all that he/she could do to resolve the situation. The remaining parent then remarries, because the offending parent is totally committed to continue his/her behavior even though it got him/her in trouble. Now, what happens to the children in this case?

1) The offending parent gives his/her consent allowing the new partner of their former spouse to adopt his/her children, because he/she wants nothing more to do with them.

2) A judge or other government official terminates parental rights of the offending spouse in the best interest of the children because the new partner has expressed a desire to adopt the children and children and remaining spouse want that too.

3) The children are then adopted by the new partner of the former spouse, because that person loves them and wants to include them in his/her family, providing a good home and a good environment where the children can grow and develop into good and healthy people.

I think this is the point that Person B was trying to make, and I agree.

In your original post, I think Person A was trying to make the point that no matter what, a father and mother will always be considered to be the persons who bring another person from one realm of existence into another, and nothing can ever change that. As far as it goes, that much is correct, but that only refers to bringing a person from one realm or state of existence into another. There is or at least should be much more to being a parent than that.

The main point that I think you should try to understand is that God will take care of His children. If the people who bring His children into this world aren’t willing to do that, He will find other people who will.

[Guest Chell]

There is a misunderstanding here, I believe. A child can only go to h-l after he or she has proven to be rebellious and unrighteous in adulthood.

If unworthy parents teach this child to be evil, without teaching it any of the doctrines of the church, then that child will either receive it from the missionaries, or receive the doctrine in the here-after and his work will be done in the temple. If, after that, the child decides not to accept the doctrine in the here-after, then he will go to the telestial kingdom, unless he has commited the unpardonable sins.

His parents are responsible to teach him correctly and if they don't it is possible that the sins of this child will be upon the heads of those parents.

If this child is taken by law from his one parent and given to the other for good reasons, reasons that are lawful, then the woman can get a divorce and her sealing to this man nullified.

If she chooses to remarry and wants to be sealed in the temple and have her children sealed to this new husband, it is posible that the church would comply. Since the first sealing was nullified, the father of the children is no longer sealed to these children anyway.

I hope this helps to clear up the misunderstanding.

[shanstress70]

No Chell & Ray, actually Person A did say something about his own possible situation - that his wife could, if she so desired, take his children away from him and have them sealed to her new husband, if she ever decided to leave him for a TBM. I like to think that Person A is not abusing his children in any way. Maybe she is assuming he is, since God forbid, he isn't a member of the LDS church. Anyway, she basically said that that should happen or it would be the same as condemning his children to hell. I included the quotes from their conversation, so you should be able to see that. They weren't talking about him abusing his children.

Obviously, no one cares about this. If I was still LDS, I would be quite pissed that someone like this is speaking for my church, making it look so bad.

Also, I found it bothersome, Chell, that you said, "If unworthy parents teach this child to be evil, without teaching it any of the doctrines of the church, then that child will either receive it from the missionaries, or receive the doctrine in the here-after and his work will be done in the temple." Does teaching your child to be evil equal not teaching your child any doctrines of the church?

You guys should question why you think all this talk is OK.

[Ray]

Try to see the universe through my eyes for a moment.

Everyone who has or ever will live on this Earth is a child of a heavenly Father, coming to Earth to advance and develop into a more glorious being. The gospel is key, because without it we would be left with no other choice but to die, remain forever without our physical body, and forever be shut out from the presence of God. (Death came through Adam, Resurrection came through Christ, and Redemption from the life we would have without Christ comes through obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. The Atonement is the key which makes the gospel work, because without that there would be no Christ).

Will the children of some parents be forced to live forever without a knowledge of the gospel just because his/her parents didn’t teach him? No, because that would not be just. Everyone will have the opportunity to learn about the gospel and they will then accept it or reject it.

Btw, evil refers to doing anything that is contrary to the will of God. If you teach your children that there is no Christ, or that the gospel is just something that some people made up, that is evil, because it is contrary to the will of God. If you have those beliefs because that is what your parents taught you, your parents will be responsible for teaching you that. After all, an honest person would simply say that they do not know whether or not it is true, because they would have no such knowledge. To bear a false witness against someone or something is not a good thing.

[shanstress70]

Originally posted by Ray@May 24 2004, 01:42 PM

Try to see the universe through my eyes for a moment.

Everyone who has or ever will live on this Earth is a child of a heavenly Father, coming to Earth to advance and develop into a more glorious being. The gospel is key, because without it we would be left with no other choice but to die, remain forever without our physical body, and forever be shut out from the presence of God. (Death came through Adam, Resurrection came through Christ, and Redemption from the life we would have without Christ comes through obedience to the laws and ordinances of the gospel. The Atonement is the key which makes the gospel work, because without that there would be no Christ).

Will the children of some parents be forced to live forever without a knowledge of the gospel just because his/her parents didn’t teach him? No, because that would not be just. Everyone will have the opportunity to learn about the gospel and they will then accept it or reject it.

Btw, evil refers to doing anything that is contrary to the will of God. If you teach your children that there is no Christ, or that the gospel is just something that some people made up, that is evil, because it is contrary to the will of God. If you have those beliefs because that is what your parents taught you, your parents will be responsible for teaching you that. After all, an honest person would simply say that they do not know whether or not it is true, because they would have no such knowledge. To bear a false witness against someone or something is not a good thing.

Why will no one speak up against what Person A (Starsky... surprise, surprise) has said. Do you or not think that Person B's children are condemned to hell because he is not a believer of your church? If you do, then you agree with Starsky. If you do not, then you agree with me that she was wrong to say it. That's all I'm looking for!

Would someone please jump in here and defend your religion? Or do you all believe this as well? I'm not asking if you believe that parents should not abuse their children, blah, blah, blah. I'm asking if you believe that children who aren't brought up in a Mormon home are condemned to hell.

[Ray]

No Chell & Ray, actually Person A did say something about his own possible situation - that his wife could, if she so desired, take his children away from him and have them sealed to her new husband, if she ever decided to leave him for a TBM.

FYI, a mother cannot “take” the children away from their father and have them sealed to someone else. A mother does not perform the sealing ordinance, someone with that authority in the Church does, and you can expect at least as much justice from someone with that much authority in the Church as you would from someone with that kind of authority in civil government. The rights of the father would first be considered, and in most situations his consent would be required. At the very least, there would first have to be a divorce between the father and mother and a sealing between the mother and her new spouse, because a wife and husband must first be sealed before they can have any children sealed to them.

[Ray]

Why will no one speak up against what Person A (Starsky... surprise, surprise) has said. Do you or not think that Person B's children are condemned to hell because he is not a believer of your church? If you do, then you agree with Starsky. If you do not, then you agree with me that she was wrong to say it. That's all I'm looking for!

Heh, sorry, I guess I was looking beyond the mark.

Children are accountable for their own sins, and not the sins of their parents. Parents, however, can sometimes be responsible for the sins of the children, and that’s what I have been talking about.

If a child dies before the “years of accountability”, they are without sin because the Lord will not hold them responsible for their actions. This is generally believed to be because children under 8 years old are not capable of knowing the difference between good and evil, even though they usually do know that they are going against the will of their parents.

After 8 years of age, children are treated like all the rest of us, and are accountable for their actions. If you do something evil knowing it is evil, you will suffer the consequences. For one thing, you will become a “bad” person instead of a “good” person, as all of your actions have an effect on the type of person you become. If you don’t know about the gospel, being evil may not mean a whole lot to you, but your conscience will bother you for at least for a little while and you would have no reason to suppose that your actions would be forgiven by God. If you don’t even know about God, or a life after this one, that may not mean much to you either, but those things will matter once you find out that there is a God and a life after this one. You’ll find out about those things after you die, if not sooner.

Anyway, sorry, getting carried away again. As a former member of the Church, you probably understand enough about the gospel to know what I was just talking about, but the simple answer to your question is not a Yes or No. My question to you is, “what would keep a child who had never heard about the gospel from his/her parents from ending up as someone who would end up in hell?” Children develop and learn most of the things that determine the type of person they become from their parents, at least during those years they are growing up with them. They can still develop into people who are totally opposite from their parents, if they are somehow prompted, but the influence of parents upon their children makes a lot of difference in how those children see the world. Can a child accept the gospel even though a parent does not? Of course, but again, consider how much more difficult it would be for that child to break away from the traditions and teachings of their parents.

[shanstress70]

Originally posted by Ray@May 24 2004, 02:28 PM

Why will no one speak up against what Person A (Starsky... surprise, surprise) has said. Do you or not think that Person B's children are condemned to hell because he is not a believer of your church? If you do, then you agree with Starsky. If you do not, then you agree with me that she was wrong to say it. That's all I'm looking for!

Heh, sorry, I guess I was looking beyond the mark.

Children are accountable for their own sins, and not the sins of their parents. Parents, however, can sometimes be responsible for the sins of the children, and that’s what I have been talking about.

If a child dies before the “years of accountability”, they are without sin because the Lord will not hold them responsible for their actions. This is generally believed to be because children under 8 years old are not capable of knowing the difference between good and evil, even though they usually do know that they are going against the will of their parents.

After 8 years of age, children are treated like all the rest of us, and are accountable for their actions. If you do something evil knowing it is evil, you will suffer the consequences. For one thing, you will become a “bad” person instead of a “good” person, as all of your actions have an effect on the type of person you become. If you don’t know about the gospel, being evil may not mean a whole lot to you, but your conscience will bother you for at least for a little while and you would have no reason to suppose that your actions would be forgiven by God. If you don’t even know about God, or a life after this one, that may not mean much to you either, but those things will matter once you find out that there is a God and a life after this one. You’ll find out about those things after you die, if not sooner.

Anyway, sorry, getting carried away again. As a former member of the Church, you probably understand enough about the gospel to know what I was just talking about, but the simple answer to your question is not a Yes or No. My question to you is, “what would keep a child who had never heard about the gospel from his/her parents from ending up as someone who would end up in hell?” Children develop and learn most of the things that determine the type of person they become from their parents, at least during those years they are growing up with them. They can still develop into people who are totally opposite from their parents, if they are somehow prompted, but the influence of parents upon their children makes a lot of difference in how those children see the world. Can a child accept the gospel even though a parent does not? Of course, but again, consider how much more difficult it would be for that child to break away from the traditions and teachings of their parents.

OK, maybe we have a different definition of hell. Are you calling anything short of the celestial kingdom hell? If so, then all this would make sense. But if not, then you aren't speaking of Mormon doctrine either. People - children or adults - don't go to 'hell' just because they don't believe in the church doctrine. (Speaking from a Mormon point of view.) When I think of 'hell', I think of outer darkness. Maybe that's where the misunderstanding is coming in. The way you guys are talking, only Mormons go to heaven and everyone else goes to hell. NICE!

[shanstress70]

Originally posted by Ray@May 24 2004, 02:28 PM

After 8 years of age, children are treated like all the rest of us, and are accountable for their actions. If you do something evil knowing it is evil, you will suffer the consequences. For one thing, you will become a “bad” person instead of a “good” person, as all of your actions have an effect on the type of person you become. If you don’t know about the gospel, being evil may not mean a whole lot to you, but your conscience will bother you for at least for a little while and you would have no reason to suppose that your actions would be forgiven by God. If you don’t even know about God, or a life after this one, that may not mean much to you either, but those things will matter once you find out that there is a God and a life after this one. You’ll find out about those things after you die, if not sooner.

AND, I'm not talking about someone who doesn't teach their children that God exists. The person in the other thread who was speaking of his children belongs to another Christian religion.

[Ray]

OK, maybe we have a different definition of hell. Are you calling anything short of the celestial kingdom hell? If so, then all this would make sense. But if not, then you aren't speaking of Mormon doctrine either. People - children or adults - don't go to 'hell' just because they don't believe in the church doctrine. (Speaking from a Mormon point of view.) When I think of 'hell', I think of outer darkness. Maybe that's where the misunderstanding is coming in. The way you guys are talking, only Mormons go to heaven and everyone else goes to hell. NICE!

Yes, to me, “Hell” is to be in one place knowing that I could have been in a better place if I had only done better with my life. I do kinda wish I had obtained a better education when I was younger, so that I could have obtained an even better job than I have now, but in the eternal scheme of things, the “job” I have while on this Earth doesn’t really make a whole lot of difference. Seeing my other brothers and sisters go on to continue in family units forever when I cannot, however, would be hell. And that would all be because I would not repent.

I think this is how the scriptures refer to Hell, too. A place of burning, which represents the guilt and remorse you have that can never be forgiven because you knew you were doing something that you shouldn’t have been doing and you kept doing it anyway. I believe the only way to escape Hell is to repent, so that we can have a clean conscience, knowing that we are doing everything we can to do what we know our Lord expects from us. We still make mistakes, of course, but those should be limited to actions that occur by accident, in the spur of the moment kind of thing, instead of anything that we deliberately do of our own free will.

If you’re limiting the idea of Hell to Outer Darkness, I think you should understand that the only people that will ever go “there” are people who know the difference between good and evil, choose to do evil despite the consequences, not even trying to repent, and actually come out in open rebellion against the plan of our heavenly Father and everything associated with righteousness, including the gospel. They are they that seek to do their own will, and not the will of God, with a full and complete knowledge of what the will of God is.

[shanstress70]

Ray: "...but the simple answer to your question is not a Yes or No."

So, Ray, you cannot say that you believe this statement is incorrect...

Person A's children would be condemned to hell because Person A is not LDS.

[Guest Taoist_Saint]

Sounds to me like Ray is defining Hell as anything lower than the Celestial Kingdom.

[shanstress70]

Originally posted by Taoist_Saint+May 24 2004, 03:40 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Taoist_Saint @ May 24 2004, 03:40 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--shanstress70@May 24 2004, 02:06 PM

Ray: "...but the simple answer to your question is not a Yes or No."

So, Ray, you cannot say that you believe this statement is incorrect...

Person A's children would be condemned to hell because Person A is not LDS.

Sounds to me like Ray is defining Hell as anything lower than the Celestial Kingdom. He defines Hell in the same way many Christians do...separation from God the Father.

I don't think he is referring to Hell as Outer Darkness in this discussion.

And obviously children over 8 years old who do not recieve the LDS version of the gospel will not go to the CK if the LDS Church is true...so from Ray's point of view they are in a sort of "Hell"...that is, the Terrestrial or Telestial kingdom.

I just think that's an ugly thing to say to someone about their children (not what you are saying, Tao, but what Starsky has said). I'm sure God would be very happy to hear one of his children say that to another. I'm not saying this to all Mormons, because there are some that I consider to be wonderful people, and are not condescending. However, I do think there are a lot of Mormons who put themselves so high above others, that it is hopeless for them to ever connect with non-Mormons. God doesn't love you guys more than non-Mormons. And you may have it right, but I don't think you do.

That said, I think I am finished with this board. Someone from this board (happens to be a good friend) once said that she totally did not feel the Spirit at another message board, so she will not go back. I have to say that I feel the same here lately. There is not the spirit of love - it is only of hate and judgement - unless of course, you are one of the 'faithful believers'. I happen to think it's all BS.

I will truly miss many of you here (you know who you are!), but I will be so glad to never have to read hateful posts from certain others (one of you especially has a lot of answering to do for yourself)!

Lata!

[Guest Taoist_Saint]

I'll be sorry to see you go.

[Rodney]

Originally posted by Ray@May 24 2004, 01:42 PM

Try to see the universe through my eyes for a moment.

No thanks. Life is scary enough already.

[Rodney]

Originally posted by shanstress70@May 24 2004, 03:57 PM

I happen to think it's all BS.

And I happen to think that you are among the vast majority. Which only makes the BS believers think themselves somehow more special. Unfortunate irony that.

[Ray]

Originally posted by Rodney+May 24 2004, 03:23 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rodney @ May 24 2004, 03:23 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Ray@May 24 2004, 01:42 PM

Try to see the universe through my eyes for a moment.

No thanks. Life is scary enough already.

See through you, we can.

Fear is the path to the dark side... fear leads to anger... anger leads to hate… hate leads to suffering.

A [saint] must have the deepest commitment, the most serious mind.

I sense much fear in you.

[Ray]

Originally posted by shanstress70 @ May 24 2004@ 03:57 PM

I happen to think it's all BS.

You must do what you feel is right, of course.

[Guest Starsky]

Shanstress stated:Why will no one speak up against what Person A (Starsky... surprise, surprise) has said.

Why surprise, surprise.....why do you hate me? Because I don't happen to tell you things that please you?Good grief.

I think everyone here has given you a very clear understanding what how it all works....there is no need for you to get balistic...

[Rodney]

Originally posted by Ray@May 24 2004, 04:34 PM

See through you, we can.

Is that the royal "we," or do you have a cat on your lap?

[Guest Starsky]

Shanstress stated:Do you or not think that Person B's children are condemned to hell because he is not a believer of your church? If you do, then you agree with Starsky. If you do not, then you agree with me that she was wrong to say it. That's all I'm looking for!

Would someone please jump in here and defend your religion? Or do you all believe this as well? I'm not asking if you believe that parents should not abuse their children, blah, blah, blah. I'm asking if you believe that children who aren't brought up in a Mormon home are condemned to hell.

I think both Ray and chell covered this, but since I was the offending party...I will try once more to clear this up.

I didn't mean to state, if I did, that children would go to hell if they had a bad parent.... I meant to say that if I were God I would want my children to be in the best homes possible..... And since I believe the church is true and the doctrine true, and the temple ordinances bound and loosed upon the principles of righteousness then it is important they be in a lds home with righteous parents...if they are to be together after this life!

So if a guy is not righteous and he brings his children up to not be righteous, the sin will be upon his head and the children will have to learn about the gospel another way.....as Chell pointed out.

I don't believe that 'not being LDS' automatically makes someone unrighteous....but it certainly doesn't give them the priesthood blessings either....one of which is being sealed for all eternity.

So, however you want to slice the pie, someone not living the commandments withing the church with the priesthood blessing intact.....will not be sealed after this life...so does it matter whether the man or woman has the children if they aren't sealed to them by the proper authority???? I say no... But if a woman or man get a divorce from their inactive or not-member spouse, and have their sealling nullified, and they get married to another spouse who is righteous, and who can be sealed then that can happen also according to the many who do this very thing...

The children, if not sealed to either parent can be taught the gospel and given a chance to receive what they missed in a non-lds family and then they will be judged accordingly.

[shanstress70]

Originally posted by Starsky@May 24 2004, 04:58 PM

Shanstress stated:Why will no one speak up against what Person A (Starsky... surprise, surprise) has said.

Why surprise, surprise.....why do you hate me? Because I don't happen to tell you things that please you?Good grief.

I think everyone here has given your a very clear understanding what how it all works....there is no need for you to get balistic...

You don't say sh** like that about peoples' children! You've got it all wrong. Even if you believe that, you just don't say things like that. And I don't hate anyone. I just happen to think you give Mormonism a bad name. I'm not ballistic. I just don't like judgmental people. I don't think God likes that behavior either.

[Guest Starsky]

Originally posted by shanstress70+May 24 2004, 04:07 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (shanstress70 @ May 24 2004, 04:07 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--Starsky@May 24 2004, 04:58 PM

Shanstress stated:Why will no one speak up against what Person A (Starsky... surprise, surprise) has said.

Why surprise, surprise.....why do you hate me? Because I don't happen to tell you things that please you?Good grief.

I think everyone here has given you a very clear understanding what how it all works....there is no need for you to get balistic...

You don't say sh** like that about peoples' children! You've got it all wrong. Even if you believe that, you just don't say things like that. And I don't hate anyone. I just happen to think you give Mormonism a bad name. I'm not ballistic. I just don't like judgmental people. I don't think God likes that behavior either.

You know Shanstress you really are out of line, you are acting violently cold hearted here, and way off track. I will be sending these posts to Spencer. I know he is your friend and he doesn't want to deal with you on this level, but you have lost it.

[shanstress70]

Originally posted by Starsky@May 24 2004, 05:11 PM

You know Shanstress you really are out of line, you are acting violently cold hearted here, and way off track. I will be sending these posts to Spencer. I know he is your friend and he doesn't want to deal with you on this level, but you have lost it.

Violently cold- hearted? Because I tell you you shouldn't say hateful things to people about their kids?

I have nothing to hide from Spencer. This has nothing to do with him. Why would it? I've never heard him say anything cold to anyone.

Spencer, if you feel the need to ban me... feel free. I'm done with this board anyway. I don't want a message board and my disapproval of someone's hurtful words to come between our friendship.

I'm basically just sticking around to see what Starsky has to say to me anyway. When she stops replying, I won't come back anymore.